Reply to post:

Section 230 authors despair of Trump, Barr, Biden, US Congress’ aggressive ignorance of critical tech law

genghis_uk Silver badge

Why would FB,Twitter or any other private system that tries to cater for the masses allow speech that is: (from 230(2)) obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable?

Your children use this - do you want them to be subjected to the worst kind of speech or would you prefer that a moderator gets to it first? If you agree that a moderator is a good idea why should a private system have to tolerate lawsuits because of the very same moderation choices?

In the US, the 1st Amendment means that Government cannot stop you from saying any form of vile, bigoted BS (within reason) but that does not mean that FB, Twitter etc. have to put up with it - don't post vile hatred and you won't get moderated... it's not that hard to grasp!

Remove 230 and the service provider can be sued for moderation decisions so what do you get? In the first instance comment sections will be switched off on websites. FB and Twitter are big enough that they can take on a lot of lawsuits but most websites cannot. The other option is not to moderate at all - if you don't do moderation, you cannot be sued for moderation decisions. You noe have a situation where only the far right have a voice as everyone else will abandon the services that have all suddenly become extensions of xChan (although even they moderate a bit) - Probably what Trump wants as it plays to his base.

This is not a partisan effort though - Barr, Trump and Cruz are joined by Nancy Pelosi who want to get rid of 230 for her own (also incorrect) interpretation. Politicians, as ever, peddling uniformed or deliberately misleading interpretations to further their agendas. The outcome of a 230 repeal would be catastrophic and what is really laughable is that the driver isn't a 'think of the children' it is because some really horrible people are a bit upset about being moderated or banned from social media. obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable. Getting rid of 230 will directly harm the children!!

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021